Gold Rock Mine project : final environmental impact statement

2018·119.3 MB·English

BLM LIBRARY
88074004
<joia Kock Mine Project
Environmental Impact Statement
Volume 1 - Chapters 1 through 3
Final
Casefile N-91957
E
l
y

D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t

-

B
r
i
s
t
l
e
c
o
n
e

F
i
e
l
d

O
f
U.S. Department of the Interior f
i
Bureau of Land Management c
e
Ely District Office, Bristlecone Field Office ,

702 North Industrial Way N
Ely, Nevada 89301 e
v
a
Cooperating Agencies: d
Duckwater Shoshone Tribe a

Eureka County
Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources
Sagebrush Ecosystem Technical Team
Nevada Department of Wildlife
White Pine County
July 2018
Mission Statement
It is the mission of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), an agency of the
Department of the Interior, to manage BLM-administered lands and resources in a
manner that best serves the needs of the American people. Management is based
upon the principles of multiple use and sustained yield while taking into account the
long-term needs of future generations for renewable and nonrenewable resources.
BLM Library
Denver Federal Center
Bldg. 50, OC-521
P.O. Box 25047
Denver, CO 80225
BLM/NV/EL/ES/15-05+1793
Cover photo taken by Maria Ryan, BLM, shows the Easy Junior Pit, which currently exists at the
proposed site of the Gold Rock Mine Project.
4 lo^2^33
'D - n 0* 4o o«/
United States Department of the Interior
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
Bristlecone Field Office
702 N. Industrial Way
Ely, Nevada 89301-9408
http://www.blm.gov
In Reply Refer To:
Dear Interested Party:
You are receiving this letter because you have expressed interest in the following proposal or you have
expressed interest in past Federal actions pertaining to public lands managed by the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) Ely District.
In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA), and the Federal
Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, as amended, the BLM has prepared a Final Environmental
Impact Statement (FEIS) for the Gold Rock Mine Project in rural eastern Nevada, in White Pine County.
The Gold Rock Mine Project FEIS has been completed and is now available for public review. The FEIS
evaluates the environmental impacts that would result from the construction and operation of the Gold
Rock Mine in compliance with NEPA and associated regulations.
The proposed project would be located east of the Pancake Mountain Range, in western White Pine
County, Nevada, on public lands managed by the BLM. The project area is approximately 50 miles west
of Ely, 30 miles southeast of Eureka, and 15 miles south of Elighway 50. The proposed project would be
located in the same geographic area as the closed and reclaimed Easy Junior Mine. The proposed project
would include expansion of the existing pit and development of facilities within the Gold Rock Mine
Project area.
Under the Proposed Action, construction and operation of the mine would result in approximately 3,946
acres of disturbance that includes the previously authorized exploration disturbance of 267 acres. Upon
completion of mining, approximately 3,455 acres would be reclaimed. Permitting of the project is
expected to take approximately 2 years. Construction is anticipated to take one year. The projected
mining period is 10 years, with associated closure, reclamation, and post-closure monitoring periods
extending the project life to approximately 48 years. Approximately 300 people would be employed
during facility construction, and approximately 150 to 250 people would be employed during peak
operations.
Under the Proposed Action, the project would include an open pit; a heap leach pad, associated ponds,
and adsorption, desorption, and regeneration plant; a mill; a carbon-in-leach (CIL) plant; waste rock
disposal areas; a tailings storage facility; water supply wells; haul roads; ancillary facilities; and
exploration areas. A 69-kV power line would be built and tied into an existing power line associated with
the Pan Mine north of the project area. A segment of county road that currently passes through the
project area would be re-located onto existing and new BLM and county roads.
The FEIS describes and analyzes the proposed project site-specific impacts (including cumulative effects)
on all affected resources. The FEIS describes nine alternatives: 1) the Proposed Action; 2) the Northern
Power Line Route Alternative; 3) the Southern Power Line Route Alternative; 4) the Northwest Main
Access Route Alternative, Northern Power Line Route; 5) the Northwest Main Access Route Alternative,
Page 1 of 4
Southern Power Line Route; 6) the Modified County Road Re-Route Alternative; 7) the Western Tailings
Storage Facility Alternative; 8) No Action Alternative; and 9) the Preferred Alternative.
»
The agency has developed a preferred alternative that is a combination of the Northwest Main Access
Route Alternative, Southern Power Line Route (Alternative 5); the Modified County Road Re-route
Alternative (Alternative 6); and the Western Tailings Storage Facility Alternative (Alternative 7). This
Preferred Alternative (Alternative 9) would result in 3,901 acres of surface disturbance, including the 267
acres of previously authorized exploration disturbance. Upon completion of mining, approximately 3,449
acres would be reclaimed.
The Preferred Alternative would involve construction and operation of a shorter power line route than the
Proposed Action by following the Southern Power Line Route. This power line would minimize surface
disturbance impacts to Greater Sage-Grouse Priority Habitat Management Area (PHMA) and General
Habitat Management Area (GHMA), as well as minimize potential raven and raptor predation of Greater
Sage-Grouse. Under the Preferred Alternative, surface disturbance would impact 1,144 acres in PHMA;
1,695 acres in GHMA; and 578 acres in Other Habitat Management Area (OHMA).
In addition, the Preferred Alternative adopts the Northwest Main Access Route Alternative which would
be located farther from known active leks than the Proposed Action, minimizing potential noise impacts
to Greater Sage-Grouse. This route could contribute to fewer vehicular collisions with big game due to its
distance from a known migration route for the Ruby mule deer herd. The Preferred Alternative would use
existing roads for the county road re-route as presented under the Modified County Road Re-route
Alternative, minimizing new ground disturbance and impacts to GHMA.
The Preferred Alternative would incorporate the Western Tailings Storage Facility Alternative by shifting
the tailings storage facility and related mine facility locations westward. Shifting the facility footprint
would minimize surface disturbance in PHMA and mule deer crucial winter range. The Preferred
Alternative would eliminate approximately 638 acres of surface disturbance in PHMA, representing a 36
percent reduction in disturbance of PHMA in comparison to the Proposed Action. The Preferred
Alternative would disturb an additional 54 acres of GHMA, representing a 3 percent increase in
disturbance of GHMA in comparison to the Proposed Action.
The BLM prepared the Draft EIS in conjunction with its four Cooperating Agencies: the Duckwater
Shoshone Tribe ot the Duckwater Reservation, Nevada; the Eureka County Board of Commissioners; the
Nevada Department of Wildlife; and the White Pine County Board of County Commissioners. After
issuance of the Draft EIS, in accordance with a Memorandum of Understanding between the BLM Nevada
State Office and California State Office, and the Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural
Resources, and the USFS Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest completed on April 1, 2016, the BLM
added the Nevada Department of Conservation of Natural Resources Sagebrush Ecosystem Technical
Team (SETT) as a fifth cooperating agency.
The BLM published a Notice of Availability of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Gold
Rock Mine Project, White Pine County, Nevada in the Federal Register on February 13, 2015 (80 FR
8107). The public was invited to provide written comments on the Draft EIS during the 45-day comment
period. The BLM conducted public meetings in Ely, Eureka and Reno during the review period for the Draft
EIS. A total of 26 individual comment submittals containing 253 individual comments were received from
the cooperating agencies, the public, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the internal
BLM review. All comments were considered and incorporated, as appropriate, into the FEIS.
Page 2 of 4
Prior to completion of the NEPA process, Midway Gold U.S. Inc. sold the Gold Rock Mine Project to
GRP Gold Rock, LLC. The Final EIS continues to refer to Midway Gold; however, the Record of
Decision will be assigned to GRP Gold Rock, LLC. GRP Gold Rock, LLC became a wholly-owned
subsidiary of Fiore Gold (US) Inc. on September 18, 2017.
Publication of the Notice ot Availability (NOA) for the FEIS initiates a minimum 30-day public comment
period. Following the availability period, the BLM may issue one or more Records of Decision based on
the FEIS. Written comments should be addressed to the BLM Ely District Office, 702 Industrial Way,
Ely, NV 89301, Attention. Maria Ryan. Comments should be postmarked or otherwise delivered to the
Ely District Office by Wednesday, August 29, 2018, to ensure full consideration. Comments may also be
taxed to Maria Ryan at [phone] or submitted electronically on the BLM’s ePlanning website:
http://on.doi.gov/1 zAxyW9. Please make your comments as specific as possible.
Additional information is available online at: https://www.blm. gov/pro grams/p lann in g-and-nepa/p lans-
lmdevelopment/nevada. Project materials may also be viewed at the BLM Ely District Office, 702 N.
Industrial Way, Ely, NV, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Pacific Standard Time, Monday through Friday,
except holidays.
Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in
your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment — including your personal identifying
information - would be part of the public record for the project and may be made publicly available at
any time. While you may ask the BLM in your comment to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we would be able to do so.
If you would like any additional information, please contact Maria Ryan, Project Manager, at
[phone] or mmrvanfajblm.gov.
Sincerely,
Mindy Seal
Field Manager
Bristlecone Field Office
Page 3 of 4
This page intentionally left blank.
BLM Library
Denver Federal Center
Bldg. 50, OC-521
P.O. Box 25047
Denver, CO 80225
Page 4 of 4
#loW1SZU?$| IP.^oVioxM
Final Environmentallmpact Statement for the Gold RockMine Project
GG53
(X) Final
() Draft
Lead Agency: U.S. Department of the Interior
\U
Bureau of Land Management
Bristlecone Field Office (formerly Egan Field Office) C <£
Cooperating Agencies: Duckwater Shoshone Tribe of the
Duckwater Shoshone Reservation, Nevada
Eureka County Board of Commissioners
Nevada Department of Wildlife
Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources
Division of State Lands Sagebrush Ecosystem Technical Team
White Pine County Board of County Commissioners
Counties Directly Affected: Eureka and White Pine, Nevada
Date EIS Filed with EPA: Friday, July 20,2018
Comments on the EIS can be directed to: Maria Ryan, Project Manager
Bureau of Land Management, Bristlecone Field Office
702 North Industrial Way
Ely, NY 89301-9408
Fax [phone]
web site: http://on.doi.gov/lzAxyW9
Comments must be received by: Wednesday, August 29,2018
ABSTRACT
In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act, this Final Environmental Impact Statement (Final EIS) evaluates the
environmental effects of the constmction, operation, and maintenance of a goldmine known as the Gold Rock Mine Project in
White Pine County, Nevada, on lands managed by the Ely District Office of the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Prior
to completion of the EIS process, Midway Gold U.S. Inc. completed the sale of the Gold Rock Mine Project to GRP Gold Rock, LLC.
The proposed project would be located in the Pancake Mountain Range, approximately 50 miles west of Ely, 30 miles southeast ot
Eureka, and 15 miles south of U.S. Highway 50. Hie proposed project is an open-pit gold mine that would include an open pit; a
heap leach pad and associated ponds, process facility, and refinery; a mill; a carbon-in-leach plant; waste rock disposal areas, a
tailings storage facility; ancillary facilities; and a 69-kilovolt transmission line to serve the project which would be supplied by
Mount Wheeler Power on a new BLM Right-of-Way. In addition, a county road that currently passes through the Gold Rock
Mine Project area would be relocated onto existing and new BLM and county roads. Construction and operation ot the mine
would result in approximately 3,946 acres of disturbance that includes the previously authorized exploration disturbance of 267
acres. The projected mining production period is 10 years. Associated closure, reclamation, and post-closure monitoring periods
would extend the project life to approximately 48 years.
Nine alternatives were carried through the analysis and include the Proposed Action (Alternative l);NorthernPowerLine
Route Alternative (Alternative 2); SouthernPowerLine Route Alternative (Alternative 3); Northwest Main Access Route
Alternative, NorthernPowerLine Route (Alternative 4); Northwest Main Access Route Alternative, Southern Power Line
Route (Alternative 5; Modified County Road Re-Route Alternative (Alternative 6), Western Tailings Storage Facility
Alternative (Alternative 7), and No Action Alternative (Alternative 8), and the Preferred Alternative (Alternative 9), which is a
combination of elements of Alternative 5, Alternative 6, and Alternative 7.
The BLM is responsible for administering mineral rights access oncertain federal lands as authorized by the General Mining
Law of 1872. The BLM Bristlecone Field Office has the responsibility and authority to manage the surface and subsurface
resources onpublic lands located within the Bristlecone Resource Area. The BLM must review the Planot Operations to ensure
use of public land in the Bristlecone Resource Area is in conformance with BLM's Surface Management Regulations (43 Code
of Federal Regulations 3809) and other applicable statutes, including the Federal Land Policy Management Act of 1976 as
amended.
Authorized Officer Responsible for the Environmental Impact Statement:
July 27, 2018
Date
Mindy Seal
Field Manager
Bristlecone Field Office
This page intentionally left blank.
RLM Library
Denver Federal Center
uirio 50, OC-521
4
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The following sections summarize the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the Gold
Rock Mine Project (project). This information is provided as a synopsis for the public, but it is not
a substitute for the review of the complete FEIS. The document is structured into eight chapters
and one appendix section containing nine appendices. The Ely District, Bristlecone Field Office
(formerly Egan Field Office) of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is evaluating an
application for a proposed gold mine. The proponent, Midway Gold U.S. Inc. (Midway), submitted
a Plan of Operation and Reclamation Permit Application (Plan) to construct and operate the Gold
Rock Mine Project (project). The project is located in rural eastern Nevada, in White Pine County
on the east side of the Pancake Range. The mine would be approximately 50 miles west of Ely,
30 miles southeast of Eureka, and 15 miles south of U.S. Highway 50 (US 50).
The Plan area would encompass 18,745 acres, and about 8,757 acres within the Plan area would
be fenced to preclude access by the public, wild horses, and livestock. Mining activities would
occur within this fenced area (mine area) in all or portions of Township 15 North, Range 56 East,
sections 3 through 10, 15 through 22, and 27 through 29. Exploration activities would occur
anywhere within the Plan area.
The BLM conducted public and agency scoping for this project in September 2013, and issued a
Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) in February 2015. In September 2015, the BLM
issued the Nevada and Northeastern California Greater Sage-Grouse Approved Resource
Management Plan Amendment (ARMPA; BLM 2015c), also known as the Greater Sage-Grouse
Land Use Plan Amendment (GRSG LUPA). The BLM prepared the GRSG LUPA to conserve,
enhance, and restore Greater Sage-Grouse habitat by avoiding, minimizing, or compensating for
unavoidable impacts in Greater Sage-Grouse habitat in the context of the BLM’s multiple use and
sustained yield mission under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA). The
project is consistent with the GRSG LUPA.
This proposed project is a non-discretionary 43 CFR 3809 action, and BLM is limited to preventing
unnecessary or undue degradation. As a result, the project is not subject to Management
Decisions (MD) SSS 2A, SSS 2F, SSS 3A, or SSS 3E of the GRSG LUPA. However, the BLM
received a commitment from the proponent to incorporate many Management Decisions (MDs)
and Required Design Features (RDFs) as Applicant-Committed Environmental Protection
Measures (Applicant-Committed EPMs, Table 2.3-8) to avoid or minimize direct and indirect
impacts to Greater Sage-Grouse and to its habitat.
The BLM identified other action alternatives that would minimize impacts to Greater Sage-Grouse
and analyzed potential impacts related to those alternatives and the No Action Alternative. The
BLM identified direct and indirect impacts to Greater Sage-Grouse and its habitat. The BLM also
identified mitigation measures to further avoid or minimize direct and indirect impacts to Greater
Sage-Grouse (mitigation measures W-4 through W-6, Section 4.9.12) and Priority Habitat
Management Areas (PHMA) and General Habitat Management Areas (GHMA) (mitigation
measures W-7 and W-8, Section 4.9.12).
In addition, the BLM coordinated with the Nevada Department of Wildlife (NDOW), the Nevada
Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Division of State Lands Sagebrush
Ecosystem Technical Team (SETT), and the proponent. The proponent voluntarily agreed to
conduct compensatory mitigation to offset residual (long-term unreclaimed) direct surface
disturbance impacts to Greater Sage-Grouse habitat (mitigation measure W-9, Section 4.9.12).
July 2018 ES-1 Gold Rock Mine Project FEIS
Executive Summary
Consistent with applicable laws and regulations, compensatory mitigation was not conducted for
residual indirect impacts.
Midway sold the Gold Rock Mine Project to GRP Gold Rock, LLC in May 2016 prior to completion
of the EIS process. GRP Gold Rock, LLC has assumed ownership of the Gold Rock Mine Project.
The BLM has retained the name of Midway in the FEIS, but GRP Gold Rock, LLC is the proponent
of the project. GRP Gold Rock, LLC became a wholly-owned subsidiary of Fiore Gold (US) Inc.
on September 18, 2017.
In developing the FEIS for the Gold Rock Mine Project, the BLM revised the document based on
public and internal review, the need for clarification in the EIS, and ongoing coordination with
stakeholders. The BLM identified the Preferred Alternative; refined monitoring and mitigation; and
incorporated administrative changes, including documentation of the sale of the Gold Rock
Project to GRP Gold Rock, LLC.
Prior to issuance of the GRSG LUPA in 2015, the BLM and the proponent identified and
negotiated voluntary funding of offset mitigation for the direct impacts of residual (long-term
unreclaimed) surface disturbance. This offset mitigation would be conducted off-site on nearby
federal lands at a ratio of 3 acres of restoration per 1 acre of residual (long-term unreclaimed)
direct surface disturbance (3:1) in Greater Sage-Grouse PHMA and 2 acres of restoration for
each 1 acre of residual direct surface disturbance (2:1) in Greater Sage-Grouse GHMA. The BLM
coordinated with NDOW on this voluntary plan.
After issuance of the GRSG LUPA in 2015, the BLM and the proponent identified and considered
another voluntary mitigation option to offset residual direct surface disturbance impacts to Greater
Sage-Grouse habitat by use of the Nevada Conservation Credit System (CCS) whereby the
proponent would purchase credits on private lands for mitigation.
In considering the CCS, the BLM and the proponent coordinated with the SETT in 2015 to
calculate the number of debits (credit obligations) that would result from implementation of the
Gold Rock Mine Project and to explore options for purchasing the corresponding number of
credits in the CCS Registry.
In 2016 the SETT conducted a desktop analysis for the proposed project to identify a preliminary
number of credit obligations needed. Then a CCS-certified third-party verifier conducted requisite
field surveys and applied the CCS tools using those data to identify final credit obligations. At
that time, no credits were available and estimation of cost per credit was not possible.
Also in 2016, the BLM identified proposed habitat restoration projects on federal lands nearby that
have already undergone NEPA analysis where the voluntary, negotiated 3:1 PHMA and 2:1 GMHA
offset mitigation might apply. A cost per acre of restoration treatment was estimated. Based on this
information, the proponent negotiated with the BLM to develop an offset mitigation option under
which the proponent would voluntarily fund the implementation and monitoring of off-site restoration
projects on federal lands nearby that have already undergone NEPA analysis. In 2017 the SETT
updated the CCS tools and recalculated the credit obligations needed for the proposed project. At
the time of writing of this FEIS, the availability and cost of a sufficient number of credits that could
be purchased in proximity to the proposed project were uncertain.
Both offset mitigation options (use of the CCS and funding of other off-site restoration projects)
are analyzed in the FEIS. The CCS tools would be applied to the selected mitigation option, if
feasible, to provide additional information. Implementation of either offset mitigation option would
provide habitat improvements in PHMA and in GHMA, consistent with applicable laws and
regulations. Consistency with the GRSG LUPA is documented in Appendix 1A of this FEIS.
July 2018 ES-2 Gold Rock Mine Project FEIS